John McCain flat out LIES about his support of the GI Bill

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 

I was simply trying to point out the fact that all politicians have a tendency to take credit for things they've actually had little to do with. It's their nature, just like when things go bad, they try to distance themselves from the issue.




posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 11:13 AM
link   
While I agree that politicians sometimes take credit for others' work, Lloyd, it's one thing to contribute to and support something and not make the vote. It's quite a different stance than McCain's opposing the GI bill all along, only to take credit for it several times.

Obama sponsored a small section of Public Law 110-181 (The Wounded Warrior Act) and he supported the bill, although he was campaigning when the actual vote took place.

Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act 2007

This Breakdown of the public law shows that Obama's Wounded Warrior Act is part of the Law that passed 91-3.



Wounded Warrior Act -
Section 1603 -
Requires the Secretaries of Defense and Veterans Affairs (Secretaries), in developing and implementing the policy required under section 1611, below, to: (1) take into account and fully address any unique gender-specific needs of recovering servicemembers (defined below) and veterans; and (2) include a description of such needs, and the manner in which they are addressed, in any reports required under this title.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by maria_stardust
 


The only reason it didn't pass muster is because it is business as usual. Try to please some group at taxpayers expense. The military is like any other job. It cost money to train people. If people are leaving the military early it is going to cost the taxpayers a lot to train somebody new and to foot the money for the GI bill. Financially, I can see where McCain was going with this. A higher GI bill will attract men and women to the military for a short period. The military is about being ready to go to war at any given moment and the GI bill shouldn't be the main reason an individual joins.

As far as him taking credit for it, I can't say. I have to do some research. It wouldn't surprise me if he did. Most politicians do the same, even Obama. They always seem to make themselves more important than what they are.

The last thing I want to say is that I support helping veterans 100%. However, just because someone has a different plan on how to better serve those veterans doesn't mean he doesn't support them. Hoorah!!!



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 

I've never claimed that McCain doesn't support veterans. That would be a silly stance for me to take considering the man is a former POW.

However, the fact remains that not only is McCain taking credit for this GI Bill, but Bush is rallying this falsehood, as well.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
While I agree that politicians sometimes take credit for others' work, Lloyd, it's one thing to contribute to and support something and not make the vote. It's quite a different stance than McCain's opposing the GI bill all along, only to take credit for it several times.
It's really disingenuous to say McCain didn't support the bill. He simply did not support it in it's current incarnation, and co-sponsored a different version of it that was much more generous to the career path military personnel, and would encourage retention as well.

Like Obama he miss the vote due to campaign obligations. I see no difference between McCain missing the vote for this bill, than Barack claiming credit for Pl 110-181 that he did not vote on either.

*By the way, I understand Barack Obama's campaign has removed this claim from his ad recently.


Obama sponsored a small section of Public Law 110-181 (The Wounded Warrior Act) and he supported the bill, although he was campaigning when the actual vote took place.
A very small part indeed, which he obviously didn't think important enough to vote on.


[edit on 7/10/08 by LLoyd45]



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by LLoyd45
It's really disingenuous to say McCain didn't support the bill. He simply did not support it in it's current incarnation, and co-sponsored a different version of it that was much more generous to the career path military personnel, and would encourage retention as well.


I haven't seen the bills side by side. So I don't know how different they were. But it LOOKS like McCain didn't want to be very generous to the people who served for 3 years or under. Like the vets of Iraq and Afghanistan. The people who answered the call when the country needed them.



Like Obama he miss the vote due to campaign obligations. I see no difference between McCain missing the vote for this bill, than Barack claiming credit for Pl 110-181 that he did not vote on either.


The difference is that Obama DID support the bill he claimed to support and McCain DIDN'T support the bill he claimed credit for. McCain even ragged on Jim Webb, the man who actually sponsored the bill! Then he took credit for it himself!

If you don't see a difference, I can't help you.


By the way, I understand Barack Obama's campaign has removed this claim from his ad recently.


IF that's true (You understand? Who do you understand this from?), it's probably because people are so stone-headed as to refuse understand what I've been explaining right here.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 12:54 PM
link   
All I want to say is that if you join the military only because you want the money to go to college, you made the wrong decision. The main reason you should join is because you want to serve your country and be willing to go to war if necessary. The GI bill is just a benefit for obligating that service. I honestly feel that McCain is trying to say that many people join just for the money. After 3 or 4 years they leave the military to go to college. This hurts because we lose seasoned veterans and have to spend more money to retrain new ones. A cost the taxpayers pick up.

From my understanding this bill is not retroactive and doesn't affect the vets that had previously agreed to the former GI bill.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


You're missing the point of this thread. McCain is claiming credit for a bill he did not support. This is nothing short of a fraudulent claim.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I haven't seen the bills side by side. So I don't know how different they were. But it LOOKS like McCain didn't want to be very generous to the people who served for 3 years or under. Like the vets of Iraq and Afghanistan. The people who answered the call when the country needed them.
McCain's version would have been substantially more generous to the career-minded individual, with larger benefits, that could likewise be readily transferred to a soldiers dependents.


The difference is that Obama DID support the bill he claimed to support and McCain DIDN'T support the bill he claimed credit for. McCain even ragged on Jim Webb, the man who actually sponsored the bill! Then he took credit for it himself!
McCain tried to improve the bill with his alternative version. I think that shows much greater support and committment to veterans affairs than simply voting "Yes" on something you had nothing to do with.


IF that's true (You understand? Who do you understand this from?), it's probably because people are so stone-headed as to refuse understand what I've been explaining right here.
Here's the newest version of the add minus the bit about P.L. 110-181. Everyone always misunderstands what the poor guy is saying.. Maybe he should consider taking English as a Second Language..



[edit on 7/10/08 by LLoyd45]



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by maria_stardust
 


I am not missing the point. All politicians claim credit for things they had little or nothing to do with. If he is doing it, I will say it is wrong. My point is to those people who says he doesn't support the GI bill. That's wrong too. He supports the GI bill. The GI bill has been around for awhile. He didn't support the way they wanted to change the GI bill. And being in the military, I saw a lot of grown men who cried like babies because they only joined for the GI bill and not for war. Once again, if you are planning on joining the military, you better be prepared to go into combat at any given moment, peacetime or not. Don't just do it for the GI bill. Semper Fi, Do or Die!!! Hoorah!!!



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Dronetek
 


John McCain has shown distain for veteran's issues over and over again as is evidenced by the poor ratings he has been given by many veteran's organizations.



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by LLoyd45
 


Saved me from doing all the work you did, Lloyd, just to prove BH wrong. Star for you, sir. McCain has every right to take credit for this bill because he DID support it, but with changes that were in the best interests of veterans.

Leave it to the Obama supporters to say "That doesn't matter! Fact is he didn't support THAT BILL so he can't take credit for it!" - despite the two bills are the same thing, but with changes that McCain would know better on since he a veteran.

Nice job trying to spin doctor yet another issue Obamatrons, but you fail again.





new topics
top topics
 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join